anatta and cetana and conditions for right view

Discussion of Abhidhamma and related Commentaries
UhBaUnTaUh
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:49 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by UhBaUnTaUh »

When I saw last 2 replies of mikenz66, and SamKR, I thought "Why I hadn't came to this forum in the past ?"

:clap:

I tried to describe my friends like that but they can't understand, though we used the same nation language.

:lol:
Parking this account.

I have been moved to another account.

User avatar
Hanzze
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by Hanzze »

Do you think it was a problem of the speaker or the listener?
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

User avatar
robertk
Posts: 3726
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:08 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by robertk »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi UhBaUhTaUh,
UhBaUnTaUh wrote: She thought management is atta. In addition, she taught cetana is management. Another, she taught cetana is anatta. (I'm not mistake typing any character in this line.)
This seems to be the key point that Khun Sujin and her students make: that any attempt at control means that one is feeding a sense of self. Therefore any attempt at development, "meditation" or some other development, is doomed to failure (according to this reasoning).

It's a point that I've discussed in detail on and off line, and I have been unable to understand. Of course, any decent teacher will warn you about feeding a sense of self ("me, the great meditator"), but Khun Sujin seems to be saying something more.

:anjali:
Mike
Dear Mike
Here is a quote from the Burmese Abhidhamma teacher Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (PaliTextSociety) xxvii

"Because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise:

1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and

2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas

3)"I can perform" and

4) "I can feel".

Thus these four imaginary characteristic functions of being have bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence.But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions
"


I think what Sujin says is very close to this statement by Thein. Already as soon as we try to observe anything trillions of moments of citta have already arisen and completely passed away.

Sylvester
Posts: 2204
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by Sylvester »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi UhBaUhTaUh,
UhBaUnTaUh wrote: She thought management is atta. In addition, she taught cetana is management. Another, she taught cetana is anatta. (I'm not mistake typing any character in this line.)
This seems to be the key point that Khun Sujin and her students make: that any attempt at control means that one is feeding a sense of self. Therefore any attempt at development, "meditation" or some other development, is doomed to failure (according to this reasoning).

It's a point that I've discussed in detail on and off line, and I have been unable to understand. Of course, any decent teacher will warn you about feeding a sense of self ("me, the great meditator"), but Khun Sujin seems to be saying something more.

:anjali:
Mike

Hee hee. When you consider how in the jhanas it is impossible to either ceteti (thinks? intends?) or to abhisaṅkharoti (intends/wills) (per DN 9), when does the process of tranquilising the sankhārakkhandha begin before popping into the jhanas?

Personally, even if Khun Sujin were logically correct to surmise that effort, intentional development etc etc feeds the sense of self (which I disagree), the intention to "not control" is also an intention! One cannot escape the need for volition in initiating and maintaining development. In fact, according to DN 9, if one were able to practise without ceteti or abhisaṅkharoti, the result would be Attainment of Cessation.

But even then, this attainment is no guarantee that the residual Higher Fetter of 'conceit' would be extinguished.

I suspect that the Buddha does not demand that we practise with a Catch-22 situation. Non-clinging arises through causes, and practice is certainly one of the necessary conditions for the arising of non-clinging.

UhBaUnTaUh
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:49 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by UhBaUnTaUh »

^

He known about that and he still confirmed the same in the underline sentence of my quote.
mikenz66 wrote:Hi UhBaUhTaUh,
UhBaUnTaUh wrote: She thought management is atta. In addition, she taught cetana is management. Another, she taught cetana is anatta. (I'm not mistake typing any character in this line.)
This seems to be the key point that Khun Sujin and her students make: that any attempt at control means that one is feeding a sense of self. Therefore any attempt at development, "meditation" or some other development, is doomed to failure (according to this reasoning).

It's a point that I've discussed in detail on and off line, and I have been unable to understand. Of course, any decent teacher will warn you about feeding a sense of self ("me, the great meditator"), but Khun Sujin seems to be saying something more.

:anjali:
Mike
Sujin was student of Nab--intimately oppose in the past, Nab was student of Burma Bikkhu--U. Vilasa.

But the same reason that you mean become lower significant through the older to the newer models.


Hanzze wrote:Do you think it was a problem of the speaker or the listener?
It was our problem, Hanzze. :embarassed:

But now it is only listener side problem.
Parking this account.

I have been moved to another account.

User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 3477
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by Alex123 »

Here is an interesting excerpt from another site:
Dispeller of Delusion
<<233. But it is no-self(anatta) in the sense of powerlessness. Or because there is no exercise of power in these three instances, [namely] "this being
arisen, let it not reach presence; having reached presence, let it not grow old, having grown old, let it not break up"; and it is void of this quality of having
power exercised over it (vasavattana).
Please note what kind of control is rejected. One can't stop arisen thing from passing away. We can't control the aggregates in the sense of making them permanent. We can't stop aging and death.
"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi UhBaUhTaUh,
UhBaUnTaUh wrote: She thought management is atta. In addition, she taught cetana is management. Another, she taught cetana is anatta. (I'm not mistake typing any character in this line.)
This seems to be the key point that Khun Sujin and her students make: that any attempt at control means that one is feeding a sense of self. Therefore any attempt at development, "meditation" or some other development, is doomed to failure (according to this reasoning).

:anjali:
Mike
Dear Mike, UhBahUhTahUh, all,

I have met Achaan Sujin and listen too her teaching more regularly recently. The above doesn't seem to me a correct representation of what she teaches.
She doesn't say: don't sit, or don't practice, but asks: why sit? and what, who does the practice?
Instead of telling people what to do, she encourages people to examine thoghroughly the meaning of "practice"-bhavana, of samatha, vipassana, sati, panna....under the light of anattaness and the law of cause and effect.
If we say, everything is anatta, everything arises and pass away by conditions, then think that we can intentionally sit and walk for sati to arise, isn't it a contradiction?
Can sati arises because of our intention to have sati? If it were so, we could intend to attain Nibanna now.
What is samatha? does it mean trying to focus on an object over a period of time?
Ekaggata cetasika arises in every citta, so the key difference here is whether kusala or akusala is present. And again, can we intend kusala or akusala to arise at a particular moment?
Her explantionation is an invitation to challenge everyone's understanding about the Buddha's teaching. We can not talk about anatta while negating causes and conditions for the arising of all conditioned dhammas, and these including sati, pasadhi, panna....by presuming that intention can be the cause for desirable dhammas to arise.
And can a view that doesn't adhere to the teaching of anatta be the cause for the arising of right understanding?

Best regards,

D.F

User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

A couple of previous threads regarding Khun Sujin:

Samma samadhi: Sujin Boriharnwanaket
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=5167" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
awareness now: Sujin boriharnwanaket
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=10888" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 17620
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi Dhamma Follower,

Thanks for the post. I may well be misunderstanding Khun Sujin's point, which for me is filtered through on-line and off-line conversations I have had with some of her followers (I had a nice afternoon tea with RobertK and others a couple of months ago). I'm afraid that the impression I come away with is mostly one of clever word play. Perhaps talking with Khun Sujin herself would be more illuminating.

:anjali:
Mike

SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by SamKR »

dhamma follower wrote: If we say, everything is anatta, everything arises and pass away by conditions, then think that we can intentionally sit and walk for sati to arise, isn't it a contradiction?
Can sati arises because of our intention to have sati?
In ultimate sense sati arises not because we intend but because of causes and conditions (intentions). However, for pragmatic purpose, until there is direct insight into not-self it is okay (perhaps unavoidable, and for many people highly beneficial) to think that we can have intention to have sati (or right actions):
Sedaka Sutta wrote: "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."
For a beginner (who does not understand not-self), it is beneficial to think that "I should control myself from doing evil things" so that he is protected from evil deeds. Of course, when controlling himself from doing evil deeds, "he" actually did not control "himself"; there was no controller; the control happened because of some causes and conditions (one of them is the thinking that "I should control myself"). However, there was protection from the evil deeds, and that is very important for a beginner. The Buddha's teaching is a pragmatic one, and his different teachings might have been directed to different groups of people having different levels of understanding: not everyone can or want to think from the ultimate level of view from the beginning.
And can a view that doesn't adhere to the teaching of anatta be the cause for the arising of right understanding?
Yes, even if there is not any strong understanding of anatta initially, by continuous practice of the noble eight-fold path (including sitting meditation, of course) and understanding of impermanence, and suffering (which are easier to understand than anatta) one will gradually reach the level where there is direct and full understanding of anatta and illusion of so called "free will".
But if someone understands anatta from the beginning, that's good; he/she could practice the noble eight-fold path (with understanding of all three characteristics).

dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

mikenz66 wrote:Hi Dhamma Follower,

Thanks for the post. I may well be misunderstanding Khun Sujin's point, which for me is filtered through on-line and off-line conversations I have had with some of her followers (I had a nice afternoon tea with RobertK and others a couple of months ago). I'm afraid that the impression I come away with is mostly one of clever word play. Perhaps talking with Khun Sujin herself would be more illuminating.

:anjali:
Mike
Dear Mike,

I met Achaan Sujin thanks to Robert, and still feel grateful to him for that.
Understanding Achaan words, however, takes time, as at the beginning, we are certainly inclined to filter her ideas through our own reasoning, and for sure that might continue to happen even after a long time. It has been my own on-going-experience, and the more I listen, the more I realize my previous understanding has not been complete...
In the past, I was one of those diligent "yogis" who feel committed to retreats and to "practice" in daily life and who believe to have had some valid experiences. Yet the truth of her understanding of the Buddha's words has had the upper hand, especially when examining my entire experience with meditation with some sincerity....

If you have the chance and feel inclined to, then meet her! She has great patience and skills in helping people to understand the right path. IMO, she is really a teacher of rarety, and it is a great blessing to come across her understanding of the Buddha's Dhamma.

Bets regards,
Tam

dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

SamKR wrote: In ultimate sense sati arises not because we intend but because of causes and conditions (intentions). However, for pragmatic purpose, until there is direct insight into not-self it is okay (perhaps unavoidable, and for many people highly beneficial) to think that we can have intention to have sati (or right actions):

D.F: Are you saying that wrong view is beneficial to some?

S:
Sedaka Sutta wrote: "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."
D.F: The sutta can be understood differently by different people. Who knows the level of understanding of the people to whom this instruction was given and how they understood them. Even right now, i could give a very different explanation of this sutta that you might disagree with. But the Buddha knew people's accumulations and each instruction was given to a particular listener. And the right understanding of his words can not go against his teaching of anatta.

S:
For a beginner (who does not understand not-self), it is beneficial to think that "I should control myself from doing evil things" so that he is protected from evil deeds. Of course, when controlling himself from doing evil deeds, "he" actually did not control "himself"; there was no controller; the control happenedbecause of some causes and conditions (one of them is the thinking that "I should control myself")
D.F: Can thinking "I can control my self" condition abstaining from doing evil deeds? If it is so, we could say, thinking "I can control my self" can condition not going to the toilet for 1 week.

Can a person thinking "I can control my-self" always keep 5 precepts?
A sotapanna, someone who has thoroughly understood "uncontrolable"-anattaness, never breaks the five precept. So which one is better condition for sila?

S:
Yes, even if there is not any strong understanding of anatta initially, by continuous practice of the noble eight-fold path (including sitting meditation, of course) and understanding of impermanence, and suffering (which are easier to understand than anatta) one will gradually reach the level where there is direct and full understanding of anatta and illusion of so called "free will".
The eight-fold path is led by right view. If there 's no right view, we can not talk about the eight-fold Path at all.
I suppose you don't mean the sitting posture can condition right view to arise?
If there is no right view now, can there be right view while sitting?
What is the cause and what is the effect here?
You talked about understanding impermanence.Impermanence of what? of a sitting yogi?

I might sound a little bit mocking, but actually I used to think like you, until I realized it was only words and vague ideas and imaginations. If the reality which arises now is not yet understood as just a reality, then impermanence, dukkha, the three marks etc... are only words.

Best rgrds,

D.F

SamKR
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by SamKR »

dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote: In ultimate sense sati arises not because we intend but because of causes and conditions (intentions). However, for pragmatic purpose, until there is direct insight into not-self it is okay (perhaps unavoidable, and for many people highly beneficial) to think that we can have intention to have sati (or right actions):
Are you saying that wrong view is beneficial to some?
No, wrong view is not beneficial to anyone. But my point is: Many people do not grasp the teaching of anatta from the very beginning, but they have to protect themselves from wrong deeds rightaway. So, for them it is better to control themselves (thinking "I will control myself from doing wrong deeds to protect myself from bad results"), than not doing any effort to control.
dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote: ["Sedaka Sutta" "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will develop mindfulness immersed in the body. We will pursue it, hand it the reins and take it as a basis, give it a grounding, steady it, consolidate it, and undertake it well.' That is how you should train yourselves."
The sutta can be understood differently by different people. Who knows the level of understanding of the people to whom this instruction was given and how they understood them. Even right now, i could give a very different explanation of this sutta that you might disagree with. But the Buddha knew people's accumulations and each instruction was given to a particular listener. And the right understanding of his words can not go against his teaching of anatta.
Yes, I agree that the suttas can be understood differently by different people. And, I am not saying that whatever you said, or what Acharn Sujin Boriharnwanaket says is not right. I don't feel myself qualified to evaluate her teachings although I think her teachings are excellent and I believe they lead to realization. My only point is that there are different people at different levels, and that it is not necessary to understand anatta right-away; they can realize it gradually while developing in Sila, Samadhi, and Panna. Perfect right view does not happen all at once. In the beginning, there can be just an inclination towards right view. After all the Buddha said:
Uposatha Sutta wrote:Just as the ocean has a gradual shelf, a gradual slope, a gradual inclination, with a sudden drop-off only after a long stretch; in the same way this Dhamma & Vinaya has a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, with a penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch.
dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote: For a beginner (who does not understand not-self), it is beneficial to think that "I should control myself from doing evil things" so that he is protected from evil deeds. Of course, when controlling himself from doing evil deeds, "he" actually did not control "himself"; there was no controller; the control happenedbecause of some causes and conditions (one of them is the thinking that "I should control myself")
Can thinking "I can control my self" condition abstaining from doing evil deeds? If it is so, we could say, thinking "I can control my self" can condition not going to the toilet for 1 week.
Can a person thinking "I can control my-self" always keep 5 precepts?
Sometimes such thinking (which itself is result of other conditions) helps to abstain from doing evil deeds. Sometimes due to other conditionings being stronger this becomes very difficult. That's why there is "right effort":
"There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen."
dhamma follower wrote: A sotapanna, someone who has thoroughly understood "uncontrolable"-anattaness, never breaks the five precept. So which one is better condition for sila?
Definitely, sotapanna has understood anatta very well, and has more right view than non-sotapanna, and does not break the precepts. But almost all people (except very few) are not sotapanna.
dhamma follower wrote:
SamKR wrote:Yes, even if there is not any strong understanding of anatta initially, by continuous practice of the noble eight-fold path (including sitting meditation, of course) and understanding of impermanence, and suffering (which are easier to understand than anatta) one will gradually reach the level where there is direct and full understanding of anatta and illusion of so called "free will".
The eight-fold path is led by right view. If there 's no right view, we can not talk about the eight-fold Path at all.
Yes, I agree. My point is that the "right view" does not come at once, it is a gradual process.
dhamma follower wrote:I suppose you don't mean the sitting posture can condition right view to arise?
If there is no right view now, can there be right view while sitting?
What is the cause and what is the effect here?
I don't mean that just sitting posture will help to arise right view. Sitting meditation may not even be necessary, I don't know. I just emphasize that if many people find sitting meditation helps them to understand some subtle truths (step by step, in a gradual way), then that's good. In the beginning they may meditate thinking that "I am meditating". But later after they understand the three characteristics, they will reach the stage where they find "there is observation, this is consciousness,...etc, arising and passing away, these are four noble truths... "
dhamma follower wrote: You talked about understanding impermanence.Impermanence of what? of a sitting yogi?
Impermanence of all that makes the 'yogi' (whether sitting, walking or sleeping).
dhamma follower wrote: I might sound a little bit mocking, but actually I used to think like you, until I realized it was only words and vague ideas and imaginations. If the reality which arises now is not yet understood as just a reality, then impermanence, dukkha, the three marks etc... are only words.
I don't find you mocking. I have also changed my understandings many times. I agree that we should understand phenomena as it arises.

dhamma follower
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 5:48 am

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by dhamma follower »

Dear Sam,
No, wrong view is not beneficial to anyone. But my point is: Many people do not grasp the teaching of anatta from the very beginning, but they have to protect themselves from wrong deeds rightaway. So, for them it is better to control themselves (thinking "I will control myself from doing wrong deeds to protect myself from bad results"), than not doing any effort to control.
We are often inclined to presume what is good and proper for other people (but who is the one that has that capacity? Only one, the Buddha!), and forget to examine whether our own understanding now is right or wrong. In your example above, is the thinking "I can control myself" or rather the understanding that "bad deeds lead to bed result" more likely to be the condition for the virati cetasika (abstaining from unwholesome) to arise? Then again, is there any idea of someone who exerts effort to control over the deeds implied in your example above? It is not self-view?
My only point is that there are different people at different levels, and that it is not necessary to understand anatta right-away; they can realize it gradually while developing in Sila, Samadhi, and Panna. Perfect right view does not happen all at once. In the beginning, there can be just an inclination towards right view. After all the Buddha said:
Uposatha Sutta wrote:Just as the ocean has a gradual shelf, a gradual slope, a gradual inclination, with a sudden drop-off only after a long stretch; in the same way this Dhamma & Vinaya has a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual practice, with a penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch.
Gradual here means direct experience can not happen at once, but comes from accumulated right understanding. It doesn't mean accumulation of wrong views will one day transform into right view.
Sometimes due to other conditionings being stronger this becomes very difficult. That's why there is "right effort":
"There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen."
Do you understand effort as just a conditioned dhamma or as someone trying to do something?
There is wrong effort and right effort. The right effort that is mentioned in the passage above can only arise with right view.
A sotapanna, someone who has thoroughly understood "uncontrolable"-anattaness, never breaks the five precept. So which one is better condition for sila?
Definitely, sotapanna has understood anatta very well, and has more right view than non-sotapanna, and does not break the precepts. But almost all people (except very few) are not sotapanna

So, for the non-sotapana, in order to become a sotapana, it is better to keep the self-view or it is better to understand that there are only dhammas arise and fall away because of conditions?
I don't mean that just sitting posture will help to arise right view. Sitting meditation may not even be necessary, I don't know. I just emphasize that if many people find sitting meditation helps them to understand some subtle truths (step by step, in a gradual way), then that's good. In the beginning they may meditate thinking that "I am meditating". But later after they understand the three characteristics, they will reach the stage where they find "there is observation, this is consciousness,...etc, arising and passing away, these are four noble truths... "
When wrong view of self taking a situation as a whole (someone practicing meditation), it hinders the understanding of what cause resulting in what effect. Can you tell me what exactly in that meditation process will give rise to panna?
And if one keeps thinking that wrong view can lead to right view, is one understanding the Buddha's teaching correctly?
I agree that we should understand phenomena as it arises
We should? Do you think understanding phenomena can arise at our will?
It leads to the question: what are the conditions for the arising of right understanding.

Best rgds,

D.F

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 17620
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: anatta and cetana (will, intention): Kamma negated?

Post by mikenz66 »

Hi DF,

I think that the points that Khun Sujin makes are very important, and worth careful consideration. But, of course, the ideas are not unique to her and her followers. I've heard many meditation teachers discuss this idea of lack of control. Sayadaw U Tejaniya is the most explicit, but almost every teacher I have paid attention to discuss the issue. It's common to hear teachers pointing out that one cannot control one's way into jhana, for example, all one can do is set up conditions. Also, it's common to translate Anatta as "no control" in Thai, so this idea is built into the language Thai monks and lay people use...

So, to me, the basic idea of "lack of control" is not particularly controversial, and is, in fact, rather obvious when one pays careful attention to the effectiveness of one's efforts to control.

What I disagree with is the extremes that some of KS's students take this argument to, claiming that any attempt at development is doomed to failure. In my view, visiting KS or discussing Dhamma just as much an attempt at control as attempting to meditate. The KS followers I've talked to object to this argument, but I'm afraid that (despite extensive on-line and off-line discussion) I am unable to understand their explanation of the difference between choosing to meditate, and choosing to read or discuss a Dhamma book. I guess I don't have good enough accumulations...

In summary, I'm grateful to have had interesting discussions with KS followers, which has been very helpful in thinking about Dhamma, even though I don't agree with all of their conclusions.

:anjali:
Mike

Post Reply